HEREDITY AND ARRANGEMENT ' : 131 



it is, others deny it. Even if it be, it can hardly 

 be supposed that microscopic research will ever 

 be able to establish the fact, and that for reasons 

 which must now be explained. 



Let us suppose that we visit a vast botanic 

 garden, and in the seed-time of each of the plants 

 therein contained select from each plant a single 

 ripe seed. It is clear that, if we take home that 

 collection of seeds, we shall have in them a minia- 

 ture picture of the garden from which they were 

 culled, or at least we shall be in possession of the 

 potentiality of such a garden, for, if we sow these 

 seeds and have the good fortune to see them all 

 develop, take root and grow, we shall actually 

 possess a replica of the garden from which they 

 came. Not exactly, it may be urged, for the 

 distribution or arrangement of the seeds must 

 have been carefully looked to, if the gardens are 

 to resemble each other otherwise than in the mere 

 possession of identical plants. I admit the truth 

 of this, but cannot for the moment discuss it. 

 At any rate we should have the same plants in 

 both gardens. 



On this analogy, many have suggested that 

 every organ in the body we must go further, and 

 say that every marked feature in every organ in 

 the body is represented in the germ by a seed 

 which can grow, under favourable circumstances, 

 into just such another organ or feature of an organ. 

 This was the theory put forward by Darwin 

 under the name of " pangenesis, " and by others 

 under other titles with which it is unnecessary 

 to burden these pages. All these theories have 



